The Water Works

image 1image 2image 3image 4cropped image 1

The Water Works.

IMPORTANT MEETING OF THE "SOLID MEN" OF BROOKLYN.

On Nov. 19th, the Water Commissioners adopted a resolution inviting four hydraulic Engineers of acknolwedged merit to examine the works and report as to their efficiency and capacity; and on the propriety of the changes which have been made from the original specifications. By a subsequent resolution the following eminent professionals were selected: John B. Jervis, the constructor of the Croton Works, Frederick Graff, son of the founder of the Fairmount Water Works of Philadelphia, John T. Clark, formerly State Engineer, and W. J. McAlpine.¹ The last named, a resident of Chicago, has been prevented by illness from meeting with the others.

The report of this Board of Engineers occupies 31 closely written foolsoap pages, and was presented by the Commissioners last evening to a meeting convened in their offices, consisting of about 150 of the largest tax payers and most prominent officials of the city of Brooklyn and County of Kings. Conklin Brush,² ex-Mayor, acted as President, and Albert H. Osborn, Secretary. Among those present were noticed, Mayor Powell,³ Senator Sloan, Supervisor Smith, Alderman H. R. Pierson,⁴ A. A. Lowe, ex-Senator C. P. Smith,⁵ Fisher Howe, John P. Rolfe, Mr. Cady, Register elect, Mr. Brainard, Surrogate elect, Mr. Van Anden, of the Eagle,⁶ Comptroller Lewis, Treasurer Smith, Mr. Harris of the Board of Education, ex Ald. Lowber and Bennett,⁷ ex Assemblyman J. H. Funk, &c, &c, &c. In short, the meeting in point of wealth, intelligence and numbers was all that could be expected or desired, and its action must be as consolatory to the Water Commissioners as it will be satisfactory to the citizens at large.

There have been three important changes in the original plan of the work:

I. The removal of the pump well 700 feet nearer to the Reservoir.⁸ The extra cost of this was $20,000. The engineers think this change a judicious one, iron not being indestructible, and, when subject to the action of pumping, liable to sudden rupture. By this change hydraulic masonry is substituted for pipes for the 700 feet.

II. The second change is in the reservoir making two divisions instead of three. Of this the engineers speak with emphatic approval. They have reason to believe that coming through fine sand the water will not need settling, as it was only for the purpose of cleaning the reservoir from time to time that three compartments were called for, and as two will answer this purpose, there is no need for a third compartment. The substituting puddle-bottom for brick they think may cause the loss of water by filtration, but not to any extent; and brick can still be fallen back on, if found necessary without interfering with the water supply.

III. The remaining change is the lateral conduits communicating with the ponds. This the engineers report on as proper, and a great improvement to the work, since if any accident should happen to one pond, repairs may be effected without interfering with the entire supply.

They append an endorsement of the works generally and believe that the supply of water will amount to the 20 millions promised. The Engineers state that they passed the five miles of conduit from Jamaica Pond⁹ to the Pump well in a boat, and found the work well executed throughout; it is well calculated for the ultimate supply of the 40 millions gallons, and will stand for centuries. The only objection they make is to the Open Canal, from which they believe that one or two millions of gallons may be lost of the daily supply, from evaporation, filtration, &c. They mention the sand drifting in, and other objections which have been urged to the Canal, and believe that it should be no object to the city to save $500,000 in comparison with converting this Canal into conduit.

Ex-Mayor Brush said he understood that it was only $120,000 which the conduit was to cost, and which additional expenditure the Common Council had denied.

Commissioner Prentice replied that the smaller sum was calculated for a barrel conduit but that the engineers' report was in favor of hydraulic masonry.¹⁰

Fisher Howe moved that the meeting recommend an additional appropriation of half a million, for continuing the conduit in lieu of the canal.

Mr. George Field suggested whether the open canal might not last for years yet, and whether the interest saved on the cost of construction would not ultimately pay for the change if experience deemed it to be imperatively necessary.

Mr. A. A. Lowe moved that the meeting express its confidence in the satisfactory execution of the works and leave it to the Commissioners' judgment whether they should apply to the Legislature for the required $500,000. Mr. Lowe was very eulogistic in his remarks to the Commissioners.

The following resolutions were, after discussion, adopted unaminously:

BY W.E. MORRIS ESQ—

Resolved, That in the opinion of this meeting it is highly expedient to substitute at an early day a covered conduit east of Baisley's Pond in place of the open canal.

Resolved, That the Water Commissioner be requested to publish the report of the Engineers just read in pamphlet form and in the Brooklyn newspapers.

Resolved, That we are pleased to find that the eminent Engineers who have made the report, so fully approve the plan of the water works and manner of their construction so far as progressed with.

BY G.S. HOWLAND, ESQ—

Resolved, That we have listened with deep interest to the able report of the distinguished Engineers on the result of their examination of the Water Works, and heartily concur in their recommendation to substitute a covered conduit of masonry instead of the open canal.

Resolved, That we entertain the highest confidence in the ability and fidelity of the Water Commissioners, and fully appreciate and approve their action in inviting the most eminent talent of the country to examine the works, and to make such suggestions in relation thereto as to them might seem expedient.

The meeting then adjourned.

---